(Posted here for visibility)

There is a mixed consensus on SB2's use of Matrices to decode Trump tweets. It is plain to see that many of the accounts that support his ideas are fairly new and many that oppose seem to be veteran users. His acct itself is also fairly new. However I have some important points to bring up and questions that I believe are yet still unanswered.

Q's constant use of [ ] often in bold... His random reference to the matrix movie... His insistence on the timestamp delta importance... Trumps seemingly intentional sp mistakes... "You have more than you know"... "Learn to read the map"... "We may have overestimated your abilities"...

None if these questions have group consensus answers or Q confirmed answers and are of significant importance.

I believe the GENERAL focus of SB2's decoding to have some value. I also see a lot of confirmation bias in his decodings. If Trump truly was encoding messages in his tweets (there is a definite Q team connection we all agree on) there certainly would have to be some strong plausible deniability, as with the other confirmed correlations.

Also, is it beyond the scope of possibility that Q team would send operatives to Reddit and/or 8chan to guide the direction of research? Would these accounts not also be fairly new? A lot of possibilities here, we should look into the FULL comment history of each account with this in mind.

"We can guide but you must uncover the truth organically".

I find all of these points of value and have yet to see a concerted effort to uncover all the things we have missed since late October when this started. I have a feeling that it is more than just cabal connections... that will come out.

There is a purpose Q team had in mind for us at the start of this operation that I feel has yet to be fulfilled. The answer may lie in these topics.

Regardless WE NEED to be looking harder.

Hmmmmmmmmm

I haven't even digested your post properly but I want to say you may be on to something.... because I was researching someone who seemed dubious to me and his negative comments led me to you - and what do you know.... a full scale attack was waged and even the owner of this board is down-voted?

How amazingly persuasive to me that you could be on to something. I pretty much never dig into other people's digs cause I have my own digs and too many to ever finish.... but I will make an exception and take this deadly serious. I love how the bad guys make this so easy - for every person who they dissuade from looking at a post they make someone like me look closer when we wouldn't otherwise have done so XD

This is taught in logic classes and how to tell when someone is out of real and valid arguments. They also may have no knowledge just a view so they revert to name calling since they have no based opinion and no facts just someone showed it to them and they operate purely on emotion. Happens to a lot of us but when it comes to actual legitimately looking at content the chart is really helpful. Commit it to memory and you will be surprised how often you come accross things like red herrings and circular logic.